13 comments

Perhaps we could re-direct the £280 million we give India in aid every year (see link below) - after all, I don't think any of the UK fllod affected areas have their own space programmes.
http://tinyurl.com/nfsf36a

We're in agreement, then! Just so long as people realise that overseas aid ain't all about getting the little black boy you see in the tv advertisements clean drinking water, but is as much about paying off dictators in banana republics to keep stability in the region. We expect a large proportion of it to get syphoned off by corrupt governments, for sure, but what's a gold-plated Rolls-Royce here and there if it maintains the status quo? There's a much bigger picture than most people imagine.

I am not so naive as not to realise the UK overseas budget has been under attack by right wing politicians and newspapers for sometime to further their own political agenda.
Overseas aid is overseen by the Independent Commision for Aid Impact (the watchdog for UK government aid, http://tinyurl.com/3d9p7o5 ) who in their latest report concluded that overseas aid has been worthwhile for the UK taxpayer. It's worth reading their reports if you are concerned about how aid money is used including aid for Syria and Typhoon Haiyan in the Phillipines, and making up your own conclusions about overseas aid.
I don't expect UKIP or The Daily Mail will ever to agree with giving overseas aid but I'd hope most people will realise the UK can afford just 0.7% of the GDP in overseas aid and this small proportion would not effect the help our own government can give to victims of our extreme weather and floods in the UK.

Sorry, Spud. That's very heartwarming, but naive to the extreme! Why do we give so much away in aid? It's got little to do with altruistic giving, rather that it is cheaper to pay off dictators and corrupt regimes in far-away places to keep them quiet and on-side, than it us to have them start wars which we (or the other first-world nations) then have to get involved in to maintain the status quo. Such wars are unpopular and cost lives (and votes!). Unpalatable it may be, but the reality is to either keep paying them off, or accept a much bigger bill (both financially and in terms of local or our soldiers' lives) in the future.

The UK gives 0.7% of GDP in overseas aid. That's not too much for a wealthy country, we still have 99.3% of GDP. The Daily Mail have never cared much for the poor in the UK and even less for the poor overseas. Let's not forget the help some of these countries that receive aid gave to Britain during two World Wars. Also let's also not forget that we all share one planet and to overcome many global problems of disease, floods and famine caused by climate change we are going to have to pull together. The Daily Mail and Nigel Farage's "Little Britain" vision betrays Great Britains true role as a leading nation that takes it's moral obligations seriously. Shame on Jilly Cooper too for small mindedness.

I think Cameron's ''money is no object'' will be his downfall . That will come back to haunt him .
BBC 6pm news showed a street with victims of the floods ......... water just about covering their shoes ! We've had households here in Gloucester who have been repeatedly flooded inside their homes on and off since Xmas . No help at all , no support . We've got builders beginning the process of start work on a new 580 housing estate at Longford ............. which is on the floodplain and currently under water ! Where on earth is common sense ?
Surely the current situation is a ''wake up '' call . Whilst the Thames hadn't started to cause similar problems near London there was no talk of money flowing into flood defences . Charity begins at home . The politicians must listen to the general public , if they don't , they're out come the next election . I've signed the petition .

nickthompson.........you saying we should keep firefighters on £40k pa on standby for floods that happen every 250 years?
Fact is, they are needed less and less, and we don't need the cover we once had.